KB-2023-003302 - [2025] EWHC 1628 (KB)
Fecha: 27-Jun-2025
Implied terms
Implied terms
The parties agreed that terms should be implied into the agreement as to how the Adjudication Panel and the Appeal Panel should exercise their powers.
The Particulars of Claim stated that the implied terms were, in essence, that the Defendant must exercise its powers (1) rationally (in the sense in which that expression is used in Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223) and (2) fairly (i.e. in accordance with natural justice). The Defence admitted the former implied term but not the latter. Helpfully, in the hearing before me, Ms Mauladad KC expressly accepted, on behalf of the Defendant, that it was an implied term that the Defendant should exercise its powers in accordance with natural justice.
- Heading
- Rory Dunlop KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge
- The contract
- Implied terms
- Factual Background
- The allegations and documentary evidence before the Adjudication Panel at the start of the hearing
- The hearing before the Adjudication Panel – Day 1 and fact-finding
- Day 2 – the findings on the allegations and the submissions on misconduct and impairment
- The Adjudication Panel decision on misconduct and impairment
- Day 3 and the decision on sanction
- The Appeal
- The pleaded claim
- Legal framework
- Submissions
- Discussion
- The first issue – the conclusion that the hug was sexually motivated
- The second issue – the treatment of the evidence as to insight, remediation and risk of repetition, including the evidence of Dr Wilkinson
- The third issue - sanction
- Conclusions